LDS Teenager Murdered at her High School in Parkland

[_Starbuck]

I had a friend commit suicide a few years ago. I later found out it he was the first police officer on the scene of a pretty gruesome murder. Breaks my heart.

Approximately 3,000 students were evacuated in the Florida shooting on Valentine's Day. Some of them left in ambulances, some were picked up by parents. Some got a trip to the morgue where they were likely later identified by their parents.

One can only imagine how many of those picked up by parents are suffering from trauma as I type this. School provided grief counseling is NOT treatment for trauma. How many of them are having flashbacks, hear and smell the shots, hear and smell fellow students dying on top of them while they lay on the floor of their classrooms.

One can only imagine how many of those students are going without treatment for trauma as I type this. How many of them will suffer from PTSD, anxiety and depression for years into the future.

One can only imagine how many of those students will turn to substance abuse, and how many will attempt or complete suicide.

Does that break your heart and if so, how much?

Does it break your heart enough to give up your right to own an AR?

It all breaks my heart.

And no.

"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.

Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty... and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer?

Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventive but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree." 1764, Cesare Becarri.

[_moksha]

So why do we see no one in Canada using the AR-15's to commit acts of violence? They are legal to own in Canada.

Neither is the BFG 9000 restricted in Canada, although it is greatly sought after by gun nuts in the U.S.

Perhaps Canadians are not as violent as Americans with high powered energy or ballistic weapons.

[_Kevin Graham]

It all breaks my heart.

And no.

Then your answer is really no. Nothing breaks your heart if you wouldn't give up your damn gun to save lives.

"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction.

Absolutely absurd. Equating the utility of fire and water with your right to play with a useless toy. A weapon designed for the strict purpose of taking a maximum number of human lives in a minimal time. You're quoting someone who is 250 years removed from our day and age, and more precisely our country as the weapons utopia that it is.

It has already been covered that you do not have an unlimited right to own a gun. You're letting the NRA and gun lobby tell you what the Constitution means so you can place your toys above human lives and keep the money flowing in their direction.

[_Kevin Graham]

District of Columbia v. Heller

On pp. 54 and 55, the majority opinion, written by conservative bastion Justice Antonin Scalia, states: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…”. It is “…not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

“Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

“We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller (an earlier case) said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time”. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’ ”

The court even recognizes a long-standing judicial precedent “…to consider… prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons.”

[_Res Ipsa]

Since when did murdered children become an "imaginary or trifling inconvenience." I think then phrase more aptly applies to not being able to buy the gun of one's choice.

[_Themis]

Perhaps Canadians are not as violent as Americans with high powered energy or ballistic weapons.

Perhaps. Guns are much harder to get, and the size of clips or magazines are tightly controlled. I would suggest the gun culture is not as wide spread, but if you want a gun you have to get a license, and certain weapons are harder to get then your typical hunting rifle or shotgun. I doubt this individual, in Canada, would have gotten a gun, and very little chance to get a gun capable of shooting a lot of people in a short time. Trying to get illegal weapons also gives one a good chance of getting caught. A society needs good restrictions to keep more guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have one. Even if we forget the mass shooting it will probably save more lives from accidental shooting deaths. I just don't think we should have the right to easy access to guns, and the easier access a society has, the more guns criminals have.

[_Meadowchik]

It all breaks my heart.

And no.

"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.

Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty... and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer?

Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventive but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree." 1764, Cesare Becarri.

There was a man who said he wanted to shoot our family. About a year later, he made another death threat. He lived next door, harassed our children, and would attempt to intimidate by walking around with a length of metal one day and waving a bb gun the next. After the death threat, I sat for a good hour and deduced that he would not try anything unless he could get away with it.

You can bet your butt that if he had a gun, my calculations would have been different. All it takes to use a gun effectively is a fit of rage. The fact that a firearm makes it so easy to kill may also make the fantasy more attractive, especially to someone who isn't normally violent.

Gun restrictions in France very likely saved my life or the lives of the eight other members of my immediate family.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I know this is really crazy, but you know what would've prevented 17 people from being murdered and 19(?) others from being wounded?

No firearms.

- Doc

With over an estimated 300 millions guns in the US what is the route for this? Is there any chance of loss of life trying to implement whatever means to get to the ends?

Don't be such a Debbie Defeatist! We beat the Nazis, flew to the moon, and have a space station. We can collect some guns. Over time you can get a lot. It's not a sprint, it's more like an ultra-marathon or some other relevant endurance event that drives the point home.

- Doc

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

This kid was shot five times by another kid who had no business having access to a firearm:



How pro-gun people can look at this and think, "Yeah. What a shame. Gotta keep my guns, though." is beyond me.

- Doc

[_Maksutov]

This kid was shot five times by another kid who had no business having access to a firearm:



How pro-gun people can look at this and think, "Yeah. What a shame. Gotta keep my guns, though." is beyond me.

- Doc

They don't look. It wasn't their kid, Doc, and they have no compassion for their fellow American and their children. Their childish self centeredness means more than any other human life. Oh yeah, and they call it patriotism. They're watering the "tree of liberty" with the blood of murdered children.